FurMark Slowdown by Catalyst Graphics Drivers is INtentional!


Our friends at PC INpact have contacted AMD about FurMark detection in the latest Catalyst drivers.

AMD has replied that FurMark’s slowdown is really intentional because softwares such as FurMark damage graphics cards and do not represent real world applications.

We all know this tweak in Catalyst was deliberate since it has been first discovered by Expreview last year. But now it’s the first time it’s official from AMD. It’s fun, the first protection has been added in Catalyst 8.8 and the second update of this protection has been added in Catalyst 9.8. Maybe FurMark will be totally banned in Catalyst 10.8 🙂
I hope this second update does not hide severe problems with the upcoming Radeon HD 5000 series

Can you imagine Intel to slowdown the CPU because Stress Prime or 3DMark Vantage CPU push the processor too far?

I coded the original FurMark algorithm in a couple of hours (and I’m not a hardcore graphics programming guru) without the goal to burn my graphics card. The overheat produced by the fur rendering is a simple consequence of the multipass nature of the algorithm (this discovery led to the first version of FurMark in August 2007). So if a rendering algorithm points out some hardware problems, the easy solution seems to get ride of it.

There are many multipass algorithms and I’m sure we’ll see soon or later some that will be able to burn the GPU in the same way as FurMark (currently OCCT GPU does the job very well too!). By the way I wonder if OCCT GPU is detected as a power virus by Catalyst? And what will occur if, for example, Carmack, in his next 3D engine, codes a cool effect that burns the GPU?

I tested for hours FurMark with my HIS’s Radeon HD 4850 without any overheat problem (with default clocks and with overclocking). Ok GPU temperature exceeded 90°C but that’s all. So what? Is HIS the unique ATI’s partner to release good quality graphics cards?

A simple solution would have been AMD to give me the list of problematic video cards in order I add an official protection in FurMark when these cards are used.

Currently I don’t have time to find a workaround, but I’ll do it asap!

12 thoughts on “FurMark Slowdown by Catalyst Graphics Drivers is INtentional!”

  1. Matumbo

    Keep on, we’re all counting on you to reveal the ugly hidden truth that AMD tries desperately to cover !

  2. Cheap engineering

    You are right man always right, i hate this type of silliness, i mean when u run games which have high quality graphics effects that put load on GPU especially shadows with antialising on and the game will crash and who is to blame then game or the GPU. Tell me ATI answer this question dont be stupid , this guy over here is helping the community to save our ass from faulty cards that cant take heavy stress while gaming. I think ATI faulty card partners have paid them to increase protection in software drivers against FURMARK so that it wont dtect our faulty cards what shame ATI.

    I am with you furmark guy, keep up your work never give up to this morons.

  3. Korvin77

    I have faulty card 🙂 My factory overclocked XpertVision 4850 (685/2000) is always do analog distort on screen when T reach 80C. Only some games can burn it up to this temp (e.g. STALKER in some places – e.g inside BAR). And FurMark never passed therefore 🙂

  4. Aerpoweron

    Hi there,
    the slow down only seems to appear on 48xx cards. I have no problem to stress my 4770.
    I’ve done some reasearch on the slowing down. The problem is the voltage regulation part. When you run furmark on the 48xx card, this part gets very hot. I got some over temperature shutdowns (the 3 leds on the back of the 4870 card) with my card, when i used a Thermalright cooler. Ram was ok, gpu was great (60 to 70°C) but the voltage regulator part was pretty hot. I burnt my fingers on the small VRM cooler!
    A better cooling solution, one heatpipe from the vrm part would have done the job.
    When AMD wants to slow it down, then they could bring up a warning message, with timeout to acknoledge. Then you can say: Yes,slow it down, or no just burn it at own risk.
    It’s sad that it looks like AMD wants to hide something.
    By the way, I never had problems with my HIS 4850s. Let them run for hours in 3way crossfire under furmark.

  5. Sven Bent

    I’m running cat 9.9 on winXP76 and furmark is still harder then quake (special stress testing config) and RTHDRIBL regarding to both in temp and current draw.

    Well furmark ever make some automatic artifact detection ?

  6. Pingback: Geeks3D – 2009 Retrospective | The Geeks Of 3D - 3D Tech News

  7. Pingback: Anonymous

  8. Pingback: FurMark 1.8.0 Hot Like Hell Edition Available - 3D Tech News, Pixel Hacking, Data Visualization and 3D Programming - Geeks3D.com

  9. bw

    If Furmark destroys the GPU then ATI should consider hire competent developers. If a game or test program damages the graphics card it is of course wrong engineered!

  10. Pingback: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580: The Anti-FurMark DX11 Card - 3D Tech News, Pixel Hacking, Data Visualization and 3D Programming - Geeks3D.com

Comments are closed.